Attila the Hun

Attila is one of the important historical personage of Turkish political life and he has also been a very curious figure for the western world. Attila's name, place and date of birth, his youth and his reign are the historical points that can't be exactly clarified by scientists. Just because of his name, it is known that he was born at a time when the Huns were at the banks of the (Itıl) Volga River. In this article, we will research and present the life, character, military expedition, ideas of Attila and his contributions to Turkish social and cultural life.

Introduzione, testo latino con traduzione italiana a fronte a cura di Elena Necchi.
Due celebri leggende, quella di Attila ‘flagello di Dio’ e quella delle origini della città di Venezia, si intrecciano in questo romanzo cavalleresco, in una «summa» dei temi narrativi più popolari nella letteratura del basso medioevo, in cui abissi di abiezione si mescolano a vertici di santità: dalla nascita mostruosa del sovrano unno alla conversione dell’imperatore Costantino, dalle stragi della guerra alla potenza dei santi, dalla brutalità del tradimento all’eroismo del guerriero. Non mancano gli accenni al Graal, i riferimenti alla storia mitica delle città venete e romagnole, e – come in qualsiasi buon romanzo – il colpo di scena con lieto finale, in cui i conti si pareggiano e buoni e malvagi si vedono compensare con ciò che è loro dovuto. Il testo, scritto in francese alla fine del Duecento, ma più diffuso nella sua traduzione latina, eseguita qualche decennio più tardi, è reso qui per la prima volta accessibile al pubblico con il corredo di una traduzione italiana.

The Catalaunian Fields is a battle well known for the role of terrain in the battle, with Jordanes' description of the engagement focusing almost in its entirety on the hill. With the location of the battlefield now known and new research having recently come to light, the role of terrain on the battle can now be accurately assessed and used as an example to show the importance of terrain in battles as a whole. Ancient Warfare 13.2, October 2019.

Данная статья предназначена для всех, кто знаком с интеллектуально-развивающей игрой ЖИПТО и хочет углубить свои представления о ней. Электронные версии моих книг, значительная часть которых посвящена ЖИПТО, доступны по умеренной цене (3,33$) на сайтах Amazon (слова для поиска: григорий томский) и распространяются среди участников Международных школ творчества и других мероприятий ФИДЖИП (Международной федерации ЖИПТО). Эти книги непрерывно дополняютя новой информацией по мере развития искусства, педагогики, математики и различных видов творчества, связанных с ЖИПТО.

The Huns are perhaps the most intriguing adversaries of the later Roman Empire. This paper examines the account of Priscus, which details his personal interactions with Attila, and compares it to other accounts of nomadic barbarians. Originally written as an assessed paper for my Master's degree at Swansea University. Awarded distinction.

Battle of the Catalaunian Plains The last victory of the Romans. By Ziv Yoffe.

אחרי שהשפיל את קונסטנטינופול והמזרח בשנת 449 , אטילה ההוני החל להביט לכיוון מערב. ניצחונותיו
הרבים והפחד שזרע ברחבי שתי האימפריות נתנו לו כבר בשלב זה את האפשרות לבוא בדרישות גם
כלפי האימפריה המערבית. במהלך הזמן אטילה הלך והגדיל את דרישותיו עד לשלב בו ביקש את
השליטה על מחצית מהאימפריה המערבית. בקשה זו באה עקב קשריו עם הונוריה ) Honoria (, אחותו
המרדנית של האימפראטור ואלנטניאנוס ) Valentinian ( ה- 3 , אשר ביקשה להתחתן עם אטילה במקום
הסנטור שאליו הייתה מאורסת כנגד רצונה, ובכך לתת לבעלה ההוני חזקה על מחצית האימפריה. אולם,
בשנת 450 פחתה השפעתם של ההונים על אירופה עקב מדיניותו הלוחמנית של מרקיאנוס ) Marcian ,)
האימפראטור החדש של המזרח, אשר ביקש להפסיק את התשלומים לאטילה, ועקב עלייתה של מדיניות
אנטי הונית במערב. השלטונות המערביים הודיעו לאטילה שלא יוכל להתחתן עם הונוריה ולקבל את -
השליטה אותה ביקש להשיג, וכן החלו להיווצר בריתות אנטי הונית עם שבטים גרמניים שונים. כתוצאה -
מכך, פתח אטילה במערכה צבאית, אותה כנראה היה מבצע בכל מקרה. מסיבה שאינה ברורה, ושעליה
ישנן השערות רבות אותן לא נוכל לפרט כאן, המערכה הופנתה דווקא כנגד האימפריה המערבית ולא
כנגד מרקיאנוס. בתחילת 451 יצאו ההונים מפָנוֹניה, חצו את הדנובה, ומסיבה שגם היא אינה מובנת,
פלשו לגאליה ולא לאיטליה. מול אטילה עמד פלאביוס אטיוס ) Aëtius (, המפקד העליון ) magister militum ( של הצבאות הרומיים באימפריה המערבית, אשר עד לשלב זה הפגין תמיד יחס חיובי להונים.
אטיוס חשד שהמטרה האולטימטיבית של אטילה היא כל מערב אירופה ולא רק גאליה או הויזגותים, או
שפחד מאפשרות של ברית ויזגותית הונית, ולכן יצא לטולוז על מנת להגיע להסכם עם תאודוריק - -
( Theodoric, Theodorid ( הראשון, מלך הויזגותים. למרות יחסי האיבה בין השניים, אשר התקיימו
עשרות שנים, הצליחו הרומאים בסופו של דבר לשכנע את תאודוריק לשתף איתם פעולה ולא לעמוד לבד
מול הפולשים. בינתיים, כבר הספיק אטילה לשרוף לא מעט ערים גאליות ופשט על בלגיה. בתחילת
אפריל בזזו ההונים את מ ץ ואחר כך את ריימס. ייתכן שההונים גם הגיעו להסכם עם סנגיבנוס -
( Sangibanus (, מלך האלאנים, כדי שיבגוד באטיוס וייתן לאטילה את השליטה על אורליאן במידה ויבוא
לכבוש אותה, אך הדבר אינו ברור. כך או כך, בסוף אפריל או תחילת מאי הטיל אטילה מצור על
אורליאן. אטיוס התעכב באיטליה עקב רעב כבד שפקד את האזור, רעב אשר השאיר אותו עם כמה חילות
עזר בלבד. בסופו של דבר, הרומאים חצו את האלפים, נפגשו עם תאודוריק ויצאו להציל את אורליאן.
כנראה שההונים כבר היו בתוך העיר כאשר הרומאים והויזגותים הגיעו, אך, בדרך שאינה מובנת, הכוחות
המערביים הצליחו לגרש את הפולשים מהעיר. כוחותיו של אטילה נסוגו כ- 150 קילומטרים לכיוון צפון-
מערב, לאזור "השדות הקאטאלאוניים" ) Catalaunian (, שם נפגשו עם כוחותיו של אטיוס, וניהלו את
הקרב ההיסטורי.

Öz:
Türklerin çeşitli sebeplerden dolayı anayurtlarından ayrılmaları ile başlayan kavimler göçü neticesinde Batı Roma İmparatorluğu'nun sonunu hazırlayan birtakım olaylar cereyan etmiştir. Türklerin önlerinde bulunan Germen kavimlerini batıya doğru itmeleri, bu kavimlerin Roma İmparatorluğu'nun sınırlarını tehdit etmesine neden olmuştur. İmparator I. Theodosius (379-395) döneminde bir yandan içeride ekonomik, dini, toplumsal karışıklıklar yaşanırken diğer yandan devletin sınırları barbar akınları ile büyük bir tehdit altına girmiştir. Böyle bir ortamda I. Theodosius 395 yılında imparatorluğu iki oğlu Arkadius ve Honorius arasında taksim etmiştir. Bu taksimat doğu ile batı arasında kesin bir ayrılığı hedeflemezken esasen de bir ayrılığın başlangıcı olmuştur. Zaman içerisinde imparatorluğun doğu yakası stratejik, askeri, siyasi, ekonomik vs. nedenlerden dolayı gittikçe güçlenirken, batı yakası Germen kavimlerin saldırı ve tazyikiyle zayıflamaya başlamıştır. Bu durum Batı Roma İmparatorluğu'nun sonunu getirirken Avrupa kıtasının siyasi ve etnik haritasının da büyük ölçüde değişmesine neden olmuştur.

Abstract:
As a result of migration of tribes, which started with Turks’ leaving their homeland
for various reasons, several events leading to fall of Western Roman Empire
occurred. Turks pushed Germen tribes who located in front area to west, which led
these tribes to threaten the border of Roman Empire. In the period of I. Theodosius
(379-395) on one hand there was increasing religious, economic and social unrest
inside; on the other hand, Roman Empire’s borders were under threat by barbarian
invasions. In such an environment I. Theodosius shared the empire between Arkadius
and Honorius, his two sons in 395. Although this sharing did not aim for
absolute separation, it was the beginning of a separation indeed. While Empire’s
Eastern side strengthened for strategic, military, political and economic reasons,
western side weakened with Germen invasions. While this situation spelled the
end of west side, it caused the political and ethnic map of the continental Europe
to vary greatly.

'Autobiografia' di Giusta Grata Onoria, figlia di Galla Placidia e sorella di Valentiniano III, fedelmente ricostruita sulla base dei testi dei cronisti del V-VIII secolo.
Questa è un estratto. Il testo completo, di 144 pagine con circa 50 fotografie, è pubblicato da Editrice Diana, 2012 - http://www.classicadiana.it/

From the fourth century CE onwards, the Western half of the Roman Empire experienced a chain of dramatic events and developments. The last Western emperor was deposed in 476 CE and Justinian abolished the Western court in 554 CE. These events, marking the transition from antiquity to the Middle Ages in Europe, are often explained by "barbarian invasions". This book, by contrast, highlights internal Roman conflicts: The empire was not conquered by foreign invaders. Instead, it was hostile groups within the Western Roman ruling classes themselves who dragged the Visigoths, Vandals, Sueves and even the Huns into their conflicts as they sought to use their fighting power against their internal enemies. The prominent role played by these warriors in the internal wars of the fifth century has led to the widespread notion that the Roman West succumbed to barbarian invasions. However, most of these warriors only took advantage of the latitude offered to them. Their goal was participation in the Roman Empire, not conquest. However, in the face of growing chaos, these mercenaries, who were called foederati because they had concluded a foedus, a treaty, with the Romans, increasingly pursued their own interests. The “barbarians” who took advantage of the slow dissolution of the Roman frontier troops during the civil wars by invading the provinces must therefore not be confused with the federate armies inside the Western Roman Empire, offering their services against the grant of money or food in order to give themselves and their families a secure livelihood. It was them who, after the collapse of the central government, finally established their own regna.

This essay, based on the newest researches about Huns and their costumes, analises Huns' origins and their long voyage to Europe. They were considered 'barbarians' as we today consider refugees and migrants and their king, Attila, has been looked at as the Antichrist, the herald of John's Apocalypse.

Türk tarihini yakından ilgilendiren Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han ile ilgili 2000’li yıllara kadar çok az sayıda roman yayımlanmıştır. İslamiyet öncesi dönem hakkındaki romanların ilk örneklerinden birisi Peyami Safa’nın Attilâ’sı olmuştur. Bu romandan sonra İslamiyet öncesi Türk tarihini ele alan romanların sayısında giderek bir artış meydana gelmiştir. Özellikle 2000’li yıllardan sonra Türk romancıları tarafından Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han gibi Türk tarihini yakından ilgilendiren hükümdarlar hakkında yazılan romanların sayısında anlamlı bir artış olmuştur.
Bu çalışma kapsamında özellikle Türklüğü konusunda tartışmalar bulunan Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han hakkındaki romanlar ele alınmıştır. Bu isimlerin bir arada ele alınmasının temel sebebi olarak Türklük meselesi göz önünde bulundurulmuştur. Çalışmanın malzemesi toplandıktan sonra bu üç isim arasında dinî inanç, yaşam biçimi, askerî ve siyasi karakter bakımından da benzerlikler olduğu ve Türk romancılarının bu üç ismi benzer bir yaklaşım ile ele aldıkları görülmüştür.
Bu çalışmada öncelikle Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han’ın yaşam öyküleri ve yaşadıkları dönem hakkında bilgi verilmiş, daha sonra Türk romanında Mete Han Attilâ ve Cengiz Han’ı ele alan eserlerin serüvenine değinilmiştir. Ayrıca çalışmada Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han’ı başarılı kılan liderlik vasıflarının sırları üzerinde durulmuş ve onların aralarındaki ortaklıkların Türk romancıları tarafından nasıl ele alındığına yönelik bir tematik inceleme yapılmıştır ve incelemelerden elde edilen veriler yorumlanmaya çalışılmıştır.
Bu doğrultuda belirlenen temalar ile yapılan incelemeler sonucunda Türk romancılarının Mete Han, Attilâ ve Cengiz Han karakterlerini genel anlamda Türklüğe hizmet eden, Gök Tanrı inancına bağlı ve göçebe kültürün etkisinde yetişmiş, kadına karşı saygılı, törelerine ve geleneklerine bağlı yüksek askerî ve siyasi karaktere sahip liderler olarak ele aldıkları görülmüştür. 
Anahtar Kelimeler: Mete Han, Attilâ, Cengiz Han, Türklük, Türk Romanı, Töre, Askerî Deha

As archaeological evidence confirms, the Germanic groups who established kingdoms in northwest Europe during the Age of Migrations were participants in a broad cultural zone extending well into Eurasia. Elements of Anglo-Saxon culture in particular have precedents among the semi-nomadic peoples of the steppes. This paper explores these connections with an eye to the Huns as a catalyst of change.

KEYWORDS: Myths of origin, funerary archaeology, animal style art, epic song, personal adornment.

This is a complex analysis of the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields. It utilizes the latest in research on the Late Roman Period, as well as research in Roman, Germanic, and Steppe tactics, to reconstruct the campaign and battle as accurately as possible, while proposing new theories and acknowledging alternative proposals. One of the most important issues it addresses is the complex historiography of the sources who write on the battle (particularly Jordanes and Priscus), how they relate to each other, and what reliable details they actually preserve. lt will also propose a location for the battle based on topography and the primary sources. Included will be an analysis of the Notitia Dignitatum used for Roman force estimates.

This thesis examines the evidence surrounding the Battle of Nedao, an engagement between Ardaric, leader of the Gepids and other rebelling tribes, and Ellac, the eldest son of Attila. It argues against the claim that, after Attila’s death, it was the sons of Attila who ruined the Hunnic empire through civil war. Instead, the political crisis which inevitably led to the battle was brought about by Attila’s murdering of his brother and co-king, Bleda, in 445 and his intestate death in 453. If there was civil war between Attila’s sons, it did not occur until after Nedao. Furthermore,
Ardaric was not of Royal Hunnic status fighting for succession at Nedao. He was, instead, one of the leaders of a rebellion that was not necessarily limited to Germanic tribes. 

The thesis focuses primarily on one source, Jordanes, since his Getica is the only known account of the battle which is not mentioned by any other contemporary source. The paper analyzes both Jordanes as an author and the language in his Getica, finding him not to be the semiliterate copyist of Cassiodorus, but instead underlines his own agency in the organizing of the work. From this broader understanding of Jordanes and Getica, it furthermore determines that he may, in fact, harbor an anti-Gepid sentiment towards the Gepid kingdom of his own day in the sixth century. Jordanes may, therefore, be anachronistically ascribing strength and importance to the Gepids’ role at Nedao, as Gepid-Constantinopolitan tension reached its zenith at the time he composed his work, thereby critically affecting our interpretation of the Battle of Nedao narrative.

Avrupa Hun hükümdarı Rua 434’te ölünce onun kardeşinin çocukları Bleda ve Attila, imparatorluğun yönetimini birlikte devralmışlardır. Attila, selefleri tarafından yürütülmekte olan Doğu Roma İmparatorluğu’nun sürekli baskı altında tutulması siyasetini terk etmemiş ve 441’de Doğu Romalılarla savaşa girerek Birinci Balkan Seferi’ni düzenlemiştir. Savaş sona erdikten sonra, kardeşi Bleda’nın 444-445 yıllarında ölümüyle birlikte Attila, Hun İmparatorluğu’nun tek hâkimi olmuş ve tüm Hun ordularını kendi komutası altına almıştır. Aradan geçen birkaç yıl içerisinde, Doğu Romalıların 434 yılında Attila ile yapmış oldukları Margus Antlaşması’nın koşullarını hâlâ tam olarak yerine getirmemiş olmaları ve Doğu Roma İmparatorluğu’nda yaşanan bazı doğal felaketler, Attila’nın 447 yılında ikinci bir Balkan Seferi’ne çıkmasına yol açmıştır. Bu seferin tarihlendirilmesi ve seferin nasıl yürütüldüğü konularında farklı görüşler vardır. Biz de bu bildirimizde Attila’nın 447 yılı Balkan Seferi hakkında mevcut olan Roma-Bizans kaynaklarındaki kayıtları aktardık ve bu sefer konusunda modern tarihçilerin yapmış oldukları incelemeleri elden geçirdik. Ayrıca, bugüne kadar Avrupa Hun tarihi konusunda özellikle Türkiye’de üzerinde pek durulmamış olan bir Süryani kaynağı olan Antakyalı İsḥaḳ’ın Hunlara ve bu sefere ilişkin yazdığı kayıtları da bildirimizde sunarak bu bilgileri değerlendirdik.

----------------

When the Hunnic ruler Rua died in 434, the sons of his brother, Bleda and Attila, mutually inherited the rule of the empire. Attila did not abandon the policy of constantly keeping the Eastern Roman Empire under constraint pursued by his predecessors, entered into a war with the Eastern Romans in 441 and launched his First Balkan Campaign. After the war came to an end, Attila became the sole ruler of the Hunnic Empire following the death of his brother Bleda in 444 or 445 and he brought all the Hunnic armies under his command. In the meanwhile, the Eastern Romans abstained from entirely fulfilling the agreements of the Treaty of Margus they had concluded with Attila in 434. Within a few years, while the Eastern Romans did not fulfill the agreements of the Treaty of Margus, some natural disasters occurred in the Eastern Roman Empire. The disobedience of the Eastern Romans to the treaty and these natural disasters caused Attila to launch a second Balkan Campaign in the year 447. There are different views on the dating of this campaign and how exactly it was conducted. In our paper, we narrated the records found in Romano-Byzantine sources regarding Attila’s Balkan Campaign of the year 447 and we examined the studies made on this campaign by modern historians. Additionally, we presented and evaluated the records written by Isaac of Antioch, a Syriac source not emphasized much on Hunnic history especially in Turkey until now, regarding the Huns and this campaign.

The medieval Latin poem ‘Waltharius’ is a Germanic saga transformed into a traditional Latin epic. This transformation has been effected, not just by the use of Latin hexameters, but also by the appropriation of complete lines and half-lines from ancient Latin epics, first and foremost Virgil’s Aeneid. In contrast, the opening of the Waltharius is curiously unepic. Instead of indicating the general theme and invoking a divinity, as the ancient poets did, our poet opens with an ethno-geographic overview that would not be out of place in a scientific or historical treatise. In this paper I will argue that the ethno-geographic opening of the Waltharius, together with the subsequent description of Attila’s conquest of Gaul, have been modelled on Caesar’s De bello Gallico, with Attila playing the parts of Orgetorix and Caesar himself. (in Dutch)

The cult of the past is a very common topos not only in the humanistic Quattrocento but also in the Middle
Ages, and it represents a strong propaganda tool in profane art associated with astronomical and moralistic
allegories, frequent in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This essay investigates some profane
themes - linked with contemporary literature - in court art between the late Middle Ages and early Renaissance.
In particular, it deals with secular cycles of Illustrious Men and Triumphs, following continuity and
transformations from older evidence (often lost) to their presence in proto-humanistic contexts in Italy before
the Quattrocento, when these typical themes are documented everywhere. Furthermore, it discusses
the relationships between images, words and memory; and the propagation of Illustrious Genealogies in
the late Trecento.

Óbuda has been subjected to a fringe argument that denies its very existence. Rather than merely dismissing these claims as being historically erroneous, this study examines how they arose in order to comprehend how such unhistorical viewpoints persist. The case of Óbuda, while being unique, is a suitable example how use of the medieval past has resulted in misunderstanding the evidence. The modern belief that Óbuda is of minor importance in comparison to another settlement – the undiscovered Ősbuda (Hungarian: Ancient Buda), is built upon previous historical constructions. The confusion of the medieval nomenclature for Óbuda is additionally linked to modern Hungarian nationalism. This derives its content from nineteenth-century romantic literature, which misread medieval chronicles, particularly in respect of the early history of Hungarian settlement. The result is an imagined Óbuda, which exists in stark contrast to the medieval remains.

Situation politique : En l'An 451 de notre ère, tout l'Empire Romain tremble sur ses fondations, en proie à un schisme important, à la menace toujours plus forte des Germains et à la terreur d'être envahi par Attila, dont la sinistre légende précède la venue. Valentinien III (425-455) Solidus consulaire Sear V, 21268-RIC X, 2032 L'empereur, Valentinien III, ne règne plus que sur un empire morcelé, assailli de toutes parts par les peuples germaniques qui prennent de plus en plus d'importance dans la gestion et la défense de l'Imperium Romanum. En matière religieuse, Valentinien III pratique une politique d'intolérance à l'encontre des cultes païens : l'application stricte du Code théodosien le pousse à émettre trois édits de persécution générale lancés contre les païens en 435, 438 et 451. Cependant, en dépit de cette politique religieuse unificatrice, Valentinien III se montre incapable d'enrayer l'affaiblissement de l'Empire romain d'Occident. En 439, les Vandales de Genséric établissent un État indépendant en Afrique et leur flotte ravage la Sicile et les côtes orientales de la mer Méditerranée. En Hispanie et en Gaule, une bonne partie du territoire est contrôlée par les peuples germaniques plus ou moins inféodés par l'Empire (Francs, Wisigoths, Suèves, Burgondes). Empire romain en 451 La (Grande-)Bretagne a été abondonnée, l'Aquitaine est aux mains des Wisigoths, le nord de l'Espagne est occupée par les Suèves, la Gaule Belgique par les Nerviens, la Tunisie (Africa) est aux mains des Vandales, ainsi que la Sicile, la Corse et la Sardaigne.

The Xiongnus have become skilled fighting people in the vast steppe. When they arrived at the Roman northeast frontier in the 5th century they enslaved their former kind tribes and caused the great migration of people. They did not return to the steppe, as the ruling historians suggest; why should they? Instead, they became the rulers of Europe for some 1200 years. The European feudalism is based on the Xiongnu consititutional principles, such as holy kingtribes, vassality, fiefdom, etc.. Germanic kings such as the Frankish king Childerich were disguised Huns/Xiongnus.

Mátyás Bél (1684–1749), the famous historian from Hungary, paid a good deal of
attention throughout his life to the genesis of the Hungarian language and alphabet, as
well as to the origins of the Hungarian nation itself. As for the roots of the Hungarian
language, Bél’s most important means of inquiry was Hebrew comparison on a Biblical basis (that is, comparing the individual languages to Hebrew), a method which had long been dominant in Europe but was already on the wane in the time of Bél. In support of it he elaborated a particular theory of his own. According to it Japheth, the ancestor of the Scythians and (in his interpretation) of the Hungarians, did not take part in the construction of the tower of Babel, and consequently his descendants preserved the “Adamic language”, that is, Hebrew, which would account for the “relationship” between Hebrew and Hungarian. The aim of Bél was to find a, possibly illustrious, place for the Hungarian language, generally unknown and thus regarded as barbarous, on the great linguistic tree, and to determine its position with regard to Hebrew and other languages. The same aim was served by the supposed relationship between the Székely (Szekler) runic writing and the ancient eastern alphabets, before all Hebrew; the Hungarians, and their supposed ancestors, the Huns and the Scythians, could thus be presented as nations of a very ancient culture.
As for the origins of the nation, Bél stuck to his opinion throughout his life,
proclaiming as he did that the Hungarians were of a Hun–Scythian–Avar origin. His
stubbornness should presumably be accounted for by the fact that the new theories
arguing for the Finno–Hungarian linguistic and ethnic relationship (Leibniz, Bayer)
were then still far from solidly established. Consequently, Bél continued to adhere to
the old theory, but wished to present it in a new form. Making use of the ancient and
medieval narrative works, he intended to breathe new life into the concept of
Scythian–Hun–Avar–Hungarian identity, and thereby to offer a critical prehistory of
scientific character, by elaborating similarities in lifestyle between the Hungarians and
their Scythian and Hun predecessors. The model he followed was probably Clüver’s
Germania antiqua. By attenuating the descriptions of Ammianus, and emphasizing the
neutral or positive remarks by Priscus, he tried to neutralise the negative overtones of
Scythian, and especially of Hun origins, for the negative image of the Huns was utterly
detrimental to the contemporary view of the Hungarians. Bél, of Slovak origins,
attributed a role to the “Slavs” (Slovaks) as well in his prehistorical conception: he
identified them as the Sarmatians and accordingly regarded them as indigeneous.
However, he argued that the Slavs had entered into an alliance, and even merged, with
both the Huns and the Hungarians, a reflection of the concept of the “host nation”
which characterised contemporary Slovak thinking. The origin of the Slovaks is but an
additional element in the theory of Bél, his major aim being the elaboration of a
representative and at the same time apologetical prehistory of the Hungarians.
The scholarly stance of Bél is in keeping with that of the so-called contemporary
Hungarus intellectuals: he regarded as his task to fight off foreign critiques and to
represent the Hungarian point of view in the international scientific discourse. Yet, in
contrast to his contemporaries, he took the field of history instead of literature and the
history of science. It is thus a protagonist of “Hungarus historiography” and “Hungarus
historical linguistics” that we have every reason to admire in his person.

Examined is the discovery of an engraved rock crystal evidently serving as the master prototype for a quantity of late 15th century bronze plaquettes. A relationship of the rock crystal with Lorenzo de’ Medici is drawn by way of a relationship with its subject: a Head of Pan. Also discussed is the crystal’s reproduction in a sketch by a young Michelangelo and finally surveyed is the curious loss of the object’s meaning in exchange for what would become a universally vilified image of Attila the Hun.

The author reconsiders some well-known facts about Dark Ages and offers a consistent picture of the events in the history of Eurasia. According to the received picture, the Buddhist's role in the events of The Migration Period (German loanword Völkerwanderung) was underestimated.

Comprender la realidad política de los últimos años del Imperio Romano pasa por explorar la figura de Flavio Aecio. Como muchos otros antes que él, el patricius actuó en pos de la supervivencia de una realidad que parecía desvanecerse, pero sus resultados superaron con creces los de sus predecesores y marcaron un listón inalcanzable para quienes le siguieron. Por ello, con este documento tratamos de revisar su biografía y aclarar las diferentes posturas historiográficas que en torno a la figura de Aecio han podido formarse a lo largo de los años.

'Two Faces of Attila the Hun in the Hungarian Historiography'

The figure of Attila, ruler of the Huns (who was long considered the first king of Hungarians) was either an apocalyptic monster or a national example, depending on the perspective. The faith in the link between Huns and Hungarians has always been a determining factor of the historical self-knowledge of Hungarians. The so-called “Hun history”, mostly forming part of Medieval Hungarian historic writings as an “invented tradition”, has been of dual nature from the very beginning, in harmony with the two faces of Attila. On one hand (using the method of interpretatio christiana), it transformed all aspects of history according to the requirements of Christian ethics that seemed foreign to Christian morals. On the other hand (with the method of interpretatio classica), it tried to harmonise national history with the already distorted image of history of classical Antiquity. In Hungarian historic writings of the early modern era (in the works of Johannes de Thurócz, Antonio Bonfini, Nicolaus Olahus and others) the history of the Huns lived on in both interpretations but in new contexts. Interpretatio classica penetrated the image of history of Humanism, while the “Christian interpretation” filled that of the Reformation. In the process of reinterpreting history, the interpretors of the history of the Huns often used the sophisticated methods of forgery. During the invention of historical facts, they were extremely careful to complete the body of the narration with elements and descriptions that seemed real and authentic, sometimes even old, although not belonging to the real context. The opposing interpretation of the Huns all turned to such retroactive material proofs. Both faces of Attila – the Christian and the classic interpretation of the history of the Huns – were for the most part a falsification of real and authentic history. This invented history, however, satisfied all aspects of the once valid, highest requirements of finding the truth.

A história dos godos de Jordanes – ou Getica – é a mais antiga das histórias restantes de um povo “bárbaro” pós-romano, mas o seu autor alega que ela é um resumo da história gótica escrita por Cassiodoro, que não atravessou a Idade Média. A obra original supostamente foi escrita na Italia durante a década de 520, quando Cassiodoro residia na corte dos reis ostrogodos, mas a de Jordanes foi escrita por volta de 550 em Constantinopolis. Cerca de um sexto da obra de Jordanes trata de eventos envolvendo Átila, rei dos hunos. O relato de Jordanes acerca das estripulias de Átila pode ser lido quase como uma peça literária independente, na qual o protagonista é o povo visigodo como um todo, com o rei dos hunos desempenhando o papel do antagonista malvado que rouba a cena, enquanto o general romano Aécio tem o papel de não muito mais do que um silencioso ajudante menor dos visigodos. No presente trabalho, traduzimos todos os excertos da Getica relativos a Átila e os analisamos a partir de alguns conceitos extraídos da Linguística Sistêmico-Funcional.
___
The Gothic history of Jordanes – or Getica – is the oldest extant history of a “barbaric” post-Roman people, but its author also alleges that it is an abridgement of the Gothic history written by Cassiodorus which didn't make it through the Middle Ages. The original work was supposedly written in Italy during the 520s, when Cassiodorus resided on the court of the Ostrogothic kings, but Jordanes' was written around 550 in Constantinople. About a sixth of Jordanes' work deals with events involving Attila, the king of the Huns. Jordanes' account of Attila's shenanigans reads almost like a single, stand-alone literary piece in which the protagonist is the Visigothic people as a whole, with the king of the Huns playing the part of the evil antagonist who steals the scene, while the Roman general Aetius serves as not much more than a silent sidekick to the Visigoths. In the present paper, I translate all the excerpts of the Getica related to Attila and analyse them with the help of some concepts extracted from Systemic Functional
Linguistics.